Re: The Korean Missile Crisis

John: Much as I hate to agree with two of the people most responsible for our lack of a credible missile defense (Levin being the primary obstructionist) Carter and Perry are right. We need to strike the missile on the NK launch pad unless they agree, forthwith, to abide by the international convention on missile testing.

That convention requires international notices (NOTAM's -- notices to mariners and airmen) which publish time, distance and purpose of launch. If they don't, we should launch a cruise missile from a B-2 without notice to anyone.

The issue of using the Ft. Greely and Vandenberg interceptors is complex. (The following isn't classified). These interceptors have a .6 reliability, meaning they are 60% likely to succeed. To be sure, you have to use at least two. The ship-based "Standard-1" missiles on Aegis ships off Japan have a .5 reliability, or 50-50 chance of success. Because these weapons are probable, not certain, means of killing the NK bird, we need to use the tool that gives a 100% chance. B-2's ain't gonna be seen or heard. And we have mensurated coordinates (3-dimensional) on the NK bird. All Dubya has to do is decide, and the fly-guys will do the rest. Forthwith.

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.